I concur with BillF's observation. But I think we need to address
the question more broadly in order to understand how the analysis
If I say, "Twist the celery!", that statement entails other
entities. It is a statement, a part of a procedure as Bill said,
that only makes sense if it is given to someone else, so that
invokes all of the concepts necessary of a duality analysis. These
include: an actor, a context and a temporal setting, at a minimum.
In terms of commands, does it make sense to group all commands
together somewhere in the ontology? Is there a lexicon of commands?
Do cooking commands go in the same ontology as hunting commands? (I
should observe that a linguist might very well follow a subject
around for a week, writing down all commands together, but it would
likely be an intermediate step in the creation of a lexicon.)
In my view it makes more sense to start with a problem statement.
What was going on when someone said "twist the celery"? I believe
you can only do a semantic or linguistic analysis, once you
understand what problem is to be solved. And, You may want to stop
at the point of a semantic analysis when you have understood the
concepts, and don't need to understand them in a context. But the
more complete view is that a command entails the completion of a
task within a context at some time, and it assumes that some
reporting is implied. (5 minutes later, "aye sir, the celery has
I would also need to know if the command can be applied to oneself,
such as "I need to remember to 'twist the celery'", when I go to the
grocery store. In that sense the command is one of a number of
meanings or rules, that I prepare to be executed at some later time.
On 4/27/2012 7:01 PM, William Frank wrote: